Abortion - been bothering me

[RayCav of ASVS]

The Abortion issue has been bothering me lately. I want to know what everyone thinks. Here's what I think:

I support contraceptives and "day after" abortion. I support and like RU-486 and all that stuff. But I tend to draw the line at the point when the fetus starts developing. I don't care if it's still not a human yet, I don't care if it's irrational, it's just something I can't support. That said, that doesn't mean I don't support abortion (actually I still consider it contraceptive rather than abortion) as said above, and I certainly support contraceptives.

[Stormbringer]

The Abortion issue has been bothering me lately. I want to know what everyone thinks. Here's what I think:

I support contraceptives and "day after" abortion. I support and like RU-486 and all that stuff. But I tend to draw the line at the point when the fetus starts developing. I don't care if it's still not a human yet, I don't care if it's irrational, it's just something I can't support. That said, that doesn't mean I don't support abortion (actually I still consider it contraceptive rather than abortion) as said above, and I certainly support contraceptives.

I agree with you for the most part. I don't think there should be ANY abortions except when a mother's life is danger or she has been sexually abused. The fetus is a human and I can't find any reason to kill it mearly for existing.

[RayCav of ASVS]

The Abortion issue has been bothering me lately. I want to know what everyone thinks. Here's what I think:

I support contraceptives and "day after" abortion. I support and like RU-486 and all that stuff. But I tend to draw the line at the point when the fetus starts developing. I don't care if it's still not a human yet, I don't care if it's irrational, it's just something I can't support. That said, that doesn't mean I don't support abortion (actually I still consider it contraceptive rather than abortion) as said above, and I certainly support contraceptives.

I agree with you for the most part. I don't think there should be ANY abortions except when a mother's life is danger or she has been sexually abused. The fetus is a human and I can't find any reason to kill it mearly for existing.

The only reason why I like "day after" abortion is because I don't think of it as abortion but rather just an extension of contraceptives....

I was just thinking, maybe it would be a good idea to give "highly vunerable" women a bottle of RU-486 just incase they get raped.

[Joe]

Ya know what? I think it's fucking horrible. I think it's probably the most barbaric, disgusting thing our society practices, and I'm ashamed of it. Abortion is murder, there isn't a doubt in my mind about that. But you know what else? There's not a fucking thing I can do about it. Fuck man, they could pass a thousand laws and women would still be getting abortions, simply because a woman who wants an abortion is going to have one, and doesn't give a rat's ass about what I think. I don't think it should receive government support in any way, beyond protecting abortion clinics from terrorist nuts.

[Stormbringer]

The Abortion issue has been bothering me lately. I want to know what everyone thinks. Here's what I think:

I support contraceptives and "day after" abortion. I support and like RU-486 and all that stuff. But I tend to draw the line at the point when the fetus starts developing. I don't care if it's still not a human yet, I don't care if it's irrational, it's just something I can't support. That said, that doesn't mean I don't support abortion (actually I still consider it contraceptive rather than abortion) as said above, and I certainly support contraceptives.

I agree with you for the most part. I don't think there should be ANY abortions except when a mother's life is danger or she has been sexually abused. The fetus is a human and I can't find any reason to kill it mearly for existing.

The only reason why I like "day after" abortion is because I don't think of it as abortion but rather just an extension of contraceptives....

I was just thinking, maybe it would be a good idea to give "highly vunerable" women a bottle of RU-486 just incase they get raped.

My problem with even morning after abortion pill is that it's killing a fetus that would ofterwise be born. No matter when or how I find it cruel and no different that murder.

And I do consider rape to be a whole different situation. I'd urge her to consider putting the child up for adoption but would not force her to carry the baby to term. But I would put a serious limit on how long she has to get the abortion.

[RayCav of ASVS]

Ya know what? I think it's fucking horrible. I think it's probably the most barbaric, disgusting thing our society practices, and I'm ashamed of it. Abortion is murder, there isn't a doubt in my mind about that. But you know what else? There's not a fucking thing I can do about it. Fuck man, they could pass a thousand laws and women would still be getting abortions, simply because a woman who wants an abortion is going to have one, and doesn't give a rat's ass about what I think. I don't think it should receive government support in any way, beyond protecting abortion clinics from terrorist nuts.

Wow, even for me, that sounds a tad bit extreme.

I was generally always opposed to abortion, sometimes even to the point of fanatiscism (though not to the extent of hurting people). I have since then become "liberalized", but by barely any measurable margin, and when compared to pro-choice people, almost not at all (like I said, RU-486 and other similar "day-after" methods)

[Crown]

I hate to think of the day that Abortion becomes a fad, but I am deffinetly PRO CHOICE! All those motherfuckers who preech about how it is a sin; Fuck off! You carry the child and raise it bitch! A woman's body is hers to do as she wishes. Not everyone is meant to be a mother.

[RayCav of ASVS]

My problem with even morning after abortion pill is that it's killing a fetus that would ofterwise be born. No matter when or how I find it cruel and no different that murder.

Actually, if I'm not mistaken, morning-after abortion works when the egg barely attaches itself to the uterine wall. Hell, RU-486 works by preventing the egg from attaching the uterine wall in the first place. In my opinion, this is no different than from a natural period. There is no fetus to speak of.

[Dalton]

I support abortion if and only if the pregnancy is a result of rape or incest, or if the pregnancy puts the woman's life in danger. However, if the pregnancy is an accident or occurs because some irresponsible cunt has unprotected sex in high school, I say let them carry the "burden".

[Joe]

Although I am opposed to the illegalization of abortion, I do not like to consider myself a pro-choicer at all. You make the choice when you spread your legs. I'm also somewhat skeptical of the "it's my body" line; surely, a woman's body is her own and she is sovereign within it, but is the body of the fetus hers as well?

[Stormbringer]

I hate to think of the day that Abortion becomes a fad, but I am deffinetly PRO CHOICE! All those motherfuckers who preech about how it is a sin; Fuck off! You carry the child and raise it bitch! A woman's body is hers to do as she wishes. Not everyone is meant to be a mother.

Then don't get pregnant in the first place. If you concieve a child by your actions you are morally responsible for it. Killing a child becuase you can't deal with the responsibility is reprehensible.

And I believe that it is a sin. It's no less than murder. That's a life and you're killing it.

[Stormbringer]

Actually, if I'm not mistaken, morning-after abortion works when the egg barely attaches itself to the uterine wall. Hell, RU-486 works by preventing the egg from attaching the uterine wall in the first place. In my opinion, this is no different than from a natural period. There is no fetus to speak of.

To my mind, life begins at conception. Once that's occurred that is a life, it's a person even undeveloped as it is.

[RayCav of ASVS]

I hate to think of the day that Abortion becomes a fad, but I am deffinetly PRO CHOICE! All those motherfuckers who preech about how it is a sin; Fuck off! You carry the child and raise it bitch! A woman's body is hers to do as she wishes. Not everyone is meant to be a mother.

While I do support a form of abortion (I don't really consider it abortion myself), I also think, in a way, abortion is a cop-out out of responsibility. Sure, I believe in consentual sex, but these people should take protection, or at least if it fails, make sure RU-486 is around.

[RayCav of ASVS]

Actually, if I'm not mistaken, morning-after abortion works when the egg barely attaches itself to the uterine wall. Hell, RU-486 works by preventing the egg from attaching the uterine wall in the first place. In my opinion, this is no different than from a natural period. There is no fetus to speak of.

To my mind, life begins at conception. Once that's occurred that is a life, it's a person even undeveloped as it is.

I used to think that to a strong degree. But according to that logic, a fertilized egg lost during a peroid is therefore "murdered". I think that's just a tad too strong of a belief.

I'm reminded of a song used to mock pro-lifers (mind you, I consider myself overall a pro-life)...."Every sperm is sacred..."

[Joe]

Actually, if I'm not mistaken, morning-after abortion works when the egg barely attaches itself to the uterine wall. Hell, RU-486 works by preventing the egg from attaching the uterine wall in the first place. In my opinion, this is no different than from a natural period. There is no fetus to speak of.

To my mind, life begins at conception. Once that's occurred that is a life, it's a person even undeveloped as it is.

I used to think that to a strong degree. But according to that logic, a fertilized egg lost during a peroid is therefore "murdered". I think that's just a tad too strong of a belief.

I'm reminded of a song used to mock pro-lifers (mind you, I consider myself overall a pro-life)...."Every sperm is sacred..."

Well, that's not exactly true; murder is when you kill another human being maliciously, and surely women do not (cannot, in fact) intend to kill their babies when they lose fertilized eggs for reasons beyond their control.

Sperm by itself is not really important, nor is an egg. It's only when these two come together and form a human being that they are sacred.

[Stormbringer]

I used to think that to a strong degree. But according to that logic, a fertilized egg lost during a peroid is therefore "murdered". I think that's just a tad too strong of a belief.

I'm reminded of a song used to mock pro-lifers (mind you, I consider myself overall a pro-life)...."Every sperm is sacred..."

The loss of a fertilized egg is not the same as deliberatly destroying it. Its the difference between, me going out and shooting someone in the head and a car accident.

I don't think that. Sperm and eggs are nothing on their own. It's once conception has occured that it has become a human being.

I hate those idiots. Those are bomb happy, violence crazed idiots that give pro-lifers a bad name. They're hypocrites and fanatics, as bad if not worse than those they oppose.

[Edi]

All right, people, simmer down and get your fucking concepts and facts straightened out before you start spewing idiocy all over the place. No offense, but most of you seem to be confusing some very important concepts here and we need to get that out of the way first.

The question of abortion is about extinguishing a potential life. An impregnated egg cell is unarguably human, in the sense that it contains human DNA (what else, crocodile DNA?), but it is not a person, it's just a potential person. Even a fetus is not yet a person, but a potential person (until a certain point of time has been passed). Why the distinction? Well, the reason for that is that we are drilled with the precept that humans have a right to life, but it is always used in the context of persons. A fetus is not yet a person.

That's the preface for the real meat of the issue, which is the question of when the right to life is achieved. Rationally, rights derive from interests. It is impossible for the fetus to have any interests at all until it develops cognitive abilities, which happens only after a certain point of time during the pregnancy when the brain has been sufficiently developed. Therefore, before that point the only interests that come into play are those of the mother. So may I suggest that the lot of you get off your high horses and eat a nice, large serving of STFU instead of getting all in a lather? And don't bother with the point that you can see a fetus reacting to being prodded in ultrasound pictures, they do that even before cognitive ability develops because a fetus develops the neural capability of reacting to external stimuli before it develops cognitive ability. The reaction is no different than our reflexively withdrawing our hand from a burning hot object if we accidentally touch one.

Abortion after the cognitive abilities develop can be compared to murder (not in all cases, it depends on the particulars of each case), and partial birth abortions and that other kind which are sort of similar are IMO murder, because the baby could often be delivered via cesarean section. At least that's the case in most of the developed world, in many third world countries it might be the only way to save the mother's life if the pregnancy is risky and where there is no guarantee whatsoever of the baby's survival past infancy.

If you're objecting on religious grounds, how about you show some evidence for the validity of your beliefs first and then we'll consider it, otherwise you lose by default.

Now as for those potential remedies, the most ridiculous one I've ever seen is the exhortation to abstain from sex. Humans are wired to seek out sex, it's instinctive behavior. How many of you are willing to abstain yourselves? If you're not, then how about another large serving of STFU?

And how come most of you seem to assume that it's always the woman's fault? It takes two to tango, and just because the woman is left bearing the child it's always her fault? The guy has no responsibility at all, he's free to go stick his dick in any woman who wants him with no obligation on his part to see that protection is used? Seems like a third serving of STFU is in order, don't you agree?

Get your facts straight and try to have an idea of what it is you're discussing before launching into long-winded diatribes about it. Sometimes it's better to remain silent and let people wonder if you're a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubts.

And if any of you got offended by what I said, too fucking bad. This is one of those issues where I will not remain silent. I would not encourage a woman to have an abortion if she got pregnant, and the idea is somewhat disquieting (no doubt due to the instinct to nurture that has been hardwired into us all by evolution), but I would not oppose her right to have an abortion for the reasons outlined above. My personal feelings do not override the principles involved.

By the way, has anyone here ever wondered why usually the most outspoken opponents of abortion seem to be men? Especially religious men, and among that group, most notably the Catholic church. Easy for them to say, because they won't be stuck with raising the child, the woman is (most of the time, there are exceptions, but they are so rare they hardly merit mention).

Edi

[HemlockGrey]

Personally, I believe that life begins at conception; I oppose abortion except in the extreme cases of stuff like rape, or if the mother's life is in danger. Other than that, either let them carry the child or put it up for adoption.

[Mr Bean]

I don't think that. Sperm and eggs are nothing on their own. It's once conception has occured that it has become a human being.

Personally, I believe that life begins at conception

This is one of those big things that is like when people belive that the Earth is only 6k Years old..

Sure your free to think that just as much as the fact the Earth is only 6k years old but the fact is we have proof for both that its so fucking untrue its not even funny

Ok fokes, First tell me, How many Featuses on avarage survive through the First Trimester?(First three Months)
Heres a fact for ya
LESS THAN HALF

I've never bought the bullshit life begins at conception, I'm sorry fokes it does not, That *Life can't survive eight seconds on its own nor devolp into a living being on its own, Infact its less complex and smarter than the avarage ameba for quite some time...

Now there are already tons of aboritions done by bodys as it is.. Know that if a women is under a certian weight limit there is a very strong chance the baby will be automacitly aboarted by her body?
Should we lock her up for her body *Killing an innocent life?

I'm sorry fokes but the Life beings at conception thing has no basies in science. Most Featuses do not survive, All Featuses are not capable of surviving on thier own until quite late in the third trimestor

And the classic Lighter to Finger example
Here take this lighter and hold your thumb in it for a mintue, There you just killed more cells than exist in the avarage feateus till the second trimester, And whats that? They could not become life either?


Well no acutaly they can thanks to cloning, Any part of your Body with a full DNA code can become a fully thinking and breathing human being.

Another example

My Aunt is a flaw in her body whereby she will miscary any child she tries to have.

Now normaly she is prengant for a month or two before the featus dies, Does this mean every time she has sex and gets pregnat, that she is murdering an innocent life?

[salm]

if i made a woman pregnant i would never ever tell her to abort the child. . i dont like abortions. i think that if you have sex you know what can happen and if she gets pregnent the woman AND the man should show responsability, have the child and raise it. not necessarily together if the relationship doesnt work but that´s another point. but in the end i dont think it´s anyone else´s but the pregnant woman´s right to decide wether she should bare the kid or abort it.

[Stormbringer]

I don't think that. Sperm and eggs are nothing on their own. It's once conception has occured that it has become a human being.

Personally, I believe that life begins at conception

This is one of those big things that is like when people belive that the Earth is only 6k Years old..

Sure your free to think that just as much as the fact the Earth is only 6k years old but the fact is we have proof for both that its so fucking untrue its not even funny

What does creationism have to do with it? It's no more than an appeal to emotion. You're wrongly linking the two.

Ok fokes, First tell me, How many Featuses on avarage survive through the First Trimester?(First three Months)
Heres a fact for ya
LESS THAN HALF

I've never bought the bullshit life begins at conception, I'm sorry fokes it does not, That *Life can't survive eight seconds on its own nor devolp into a living being on its own, Infact its less complex and smarter than the avarage ameba for quite some time...

Now there are already tons of aboritions done by bodys as it is.. Know that if a women is under a certian weight limit there is a very strong chance the baby will be automacitly aboarted by her body?
Should we lock her up for her body *Killing an innocent life?

I'm sorry fokes but the Life beings at conception thing has no basies in science. Most Featuses do not survive, All Featuses are not capable of surviving on thier own until quite late in the third trimestor

What's your source for the half number? I'd like to see that.

A miscarriage is not the same as a abortion. One is purely accidental loss and the other is deliberate killing.

And there are plenty of people that require others to survive. Should we kill them? Or do they not qualify as people?

My Aunt is a flaw in her body whereby she will miscary any child she tries to have.

Now normaly she is prengant for a month or two before the featus dies, Does this mean every time she has sex and gets pregnat, that she is murdering an innocent life?

No, she's creating a life she knows can't and won't survive but not actively killing it. If she kept geetting pregnant and knows she can't carry to term I think that would be more or less murder.

[Lagmonster]

...Fetal rights. Silly, that.

I know a guy who exists SOLELY because his mother got date-raped and was not allowed by her personal faith to have an abortion. She basically gave the kid up for adoption and now, 28 years later, wants nothing to do with him, won't talk to him, doesn't want to know that he exists.

On the other hand, he is well adjusted now (all things considered), but even HE acknowledges that it would have been better for all concerned if he'd been quietly killed.

Life is hard. You need to have the fucking balls to make hard choices. Choosing to spare a life hardly aware of its own existance and without real personality or memories just because you feel bad about killing it, and then dooming it to a life of hardship or, just as bad, abandoning it to be raised by the state orphanage...bah!

And parents who have kids because they were stupid and try to raise them when they aren't ready or able to often have hard lives themselves. Can you imagine being hated by your parents just because you were a result of their stupidity and a burden on their lives? I realize it's the parents' fault for getting it on, and they should be accountable for their actions, but many of those idiots aren't going to be worthy or able parents. So where are you then? People like to say they have the right to exist, but the right to exist doesn't always make it a privilege to do so.

[Nick]

I'll pretty much take what Edi said and add a few bits :>

Before I start a couple of points on terminology (just so we're all on the same page as to the proper definitions of the words that get thrown around when talking about abortion):
Egg, sperm: OK, no worries here, everyone knows these two.
Zygote: The combined egg/sperm, PRIOR to implantation in the uterine wall
Embryo: The combined egg/spern, during the first trimester (0-3 months)
Foetus: The combined egg/spern, AFTER the first trimester (3-9 months)

The scientific perspective is that actual cognition only starts to develop in the foetus - it is only during this stage that there is sufficient nerve mass for cognition to be even remotely feasible. So, while the embryo has the potential to become a person, it is not a person. With a foetus, the situation is different, because somewhere in that time frame cognition starts to develop, and the foetus actually starts to become a person (I'm still waiting for the day when some disabled kid sues his/her mother for smoking/excessive drinking/taking drugs during the child's second and third trimesters).

So then, where does this leave us? Well, there are actually two issues posed in this thread. Issue 1 is "How do you personally feel about abortion?" and Issue 2 is "What is appropriate for the law to say about abortion?"

For issue 1, it is valid to say "I believe an embryo is a person, and so abortion is murder". It is also valid to say "I believe a zygote is a person, and so 'morning after' pills which prevent uterine attachment are murder". For that matter, it's even valid to say "I have sexual issues due to my cultural indoctrination, and you should only have sex for the purpose of procreation, and never use contraception." These are all valid, because when we're talking about a personal position, then you can be as irrational as you like - I can't stop you.

For issue 2, though, irrational beliefs can't be allowed into it. The law should be based on rationality (and, in general, reflects a time delayed effort at blundering in that direction). And so, for example, you get laws like those in Queensland where abortions of an embryo (i.e. first trimester) are purely a matter of choice, but abortions of a foetus are justified only if it is a medical emergency (essentially, when it is impossible to save both mother and child, but it is possible to save the mother at the expense of the child. As you can see, the actual person continues to take precedence over the potential person, but to a lesser degree).

The reason issue 2 is different (and MUST be grounded in rationality) is because these views ARE imposed on people who disagree with them. There are fuckwits out there who think that it is OK to kill a child that could quite safely be born by Caesarian section, or is even in the process of being born naturally. They aren't any better than someone who lets the baby be born, picks it up, and then wrings its neck. No-one who has ever seen a newborn after its eyes have had a chance to adjust is likely to deny that by the time of birth there is some definite brain power there. Even though the baby has a long way to go before they become a fully conscious individual, they are certainly a being worthy of our regard.

[Colonel Olrik]

Personally, I believe that life begins at conception; I oppose abortion except in the extreme cases of stuff like rape, or if the mother's life is in danger. Other than that, either let them carry the child or put it up for adoption.

Can't you see the hypocrisy of that view? If you sincerily believe that life begins at conception (well, of course it does, it's certainly alive, in the same sense as sperm or an ovulus is),meaning human life, then why does that innocent being have to pay for being a result of a rape?

That always bothers me.

To be coherent, you and others should not make an exception for that case. In the case of the mother's life being in danger, then it's a life for a life and your view makes more sense.

I just cannot remain quiet in with this kind of discussions. Why do otherwise intelligent people rely solely upon gut feelings concerning this particular issue?

Be scientific. You cannot by no means say that a bunch of cells is a human being, or that it suffers, feels, etc. On the other hand, there's the "legalize abortion until the 10th month" morons, that fail to explain why a fully functional unborn baby has no rights compared to a recently born one.

There is a simple way of clearing up the waters. The criterium for death declaration is the cessation of the brain activity. Why don't we simply apply the same criterium towards the definition of being human?
It is well determined the period when the fetus EEG gains activity. Give it a safety margin, and make it the official point demarking illegal abortion. Yes, even in cases of rape. Beyond that point, only concerns about the mother's safety can give way to abortion.

edit: Just seen Nick's post. I absolutely agree with him, and he explained the view I also share in greater detail that I did

[Nick]

There is a simple way of clearing up the waters. The criterium for death declaration is the cessation of the brain activity. Why don't we simply apply the same criterium towards the definition of being human?
It is well determined the period when the fetus EEG gains activity. Give it a safety margin, and make it the official point demarking illegal abortion. Yes, even in cases of rape. Beyond that point, only concerns about the mother's safety can give way to abortion.

Interessant - I hadn't thought about the concept of inverting "brain death" to get "brain life". Much better than my characterisation of it as relating to the number of nerve cells (obviously, the two ideas are correlated - but I think your way conveys the point much better).

How can you murder something which is officially brain dead?